The Department of Justice (DOJ) has ordered all law schools in the United States to suspend diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) admission practices, and Attorney General Pam Bondi said, “We are allowed to go too far as nations to allow abominable practices of discrimination based on the race that exists and ongoing.”
In a memorandum of deans and admissions officers of all American law schools obtained by Breitbart News, Bondi burned the standards for the American Bar Association (ABA) DEI, highlighting President Donald Trump's January Presidential Order To restore “Merit-Based Opportunities”:
As a law school administrator, you definitely know that the American Bar Association (“ABA”) standards and standard 206 of the Procedural Rules for Law School Recognition explicitly requires “to demonstrate a commitment to diversity and inclusion through concrete actions.” Previous administrations allowed “prevailing, disgusting racial-based preferences and other forms of racism,” spreading “over all aspects of academia.”[p]The ropeonents of these discriminatory practices have sought to justify them under the banner of “diversity, equity, inclusion” (“Dei”). But President Trump was clear:[D]Fascinated as so-called “diversity, equity, and inclusion,” anger, sleazy, and immoral race and gender preferences violate the country's civil rights laws and are no longer tolerated.
ABA vote Last month, standard 206 will be suspended. Until August 31st, the standards are revised to “integrate legal developments from the Ministry of Education with future guidance.”
The role the Department of Education can play in ABA rules is unknown after Trump signed an executive order last week. I'm looking for it Secretary of Education “We will take all necessary steps to promote the Department of Education's closure and promote the return of education authority to the state and local communities.”
Bondi delved deeper into Law School Dei's policy and said it had already notified the Bar Association that the only “movement” was “at least the complete abolition of Standard 206.”[s] Illegal discrimination. ”
“In response, the ABA ensures the Department of Justice that “the law does not require that it violate the law in order to comply with the accreditation standards,” and recognizes that the federal government's status as a recognized accreditation body “is not a right, not a right.”
The ABA also states that it has requested that “no” law schools violate the law in the past. That's absolutely wrong: Standard 206 has been in books for many years and requires blatantly illegal discrimination. Standard plain texts acknowledge this by threatening this.[t]He is a constitutional provision or requirement of a law that aims to prohibit consideration of gender, race, ethnicity or country of origin in hospitalization. Alternatively, employment decisions are not justifications for violations of schools that do not comply with Standard 206. “Furthermore, despite its commitment to amend Standard 206, the ABA reaffirmed its “commitment” to prefer “people who have historically been excluded from the legal profession.”
The DOJ monitors the actions and enforcement of the ABA Standard 206, but Bondi said he wrote to law school administrators to “clearly” that the school's directives apply to them as well.
The Department of Justice is closely monitoring the ABA's actions in rethinking standard 206 in May. In the meantime, I am writing to make it clear that the same legal principles that prohibit law schools from requiring law schools to follow diversity mandate are prohibited from doing so voluntarily.
There is no longer a question of the illegality of race-based preferences in law school admissions and employment decisions. Fair Admissions, Inc. v. For Harvard University President & Fellow students, the question was “Whether the university will make an admission decision that will turn on the race of the applicant?” The answer was “No.” Race-based positive behavior progresses with “harmful stereotypes.” Such programs “treat individuals as products of their race, appreciate their own thoughts and efforts, and are extremely valuable as citizens – belonging to standards prohibited by the government by history and the constitution.” This applies equally to university employment decisions. “To eliminate racism means to eliminate it all.” and “[i]f Educational institutions treat people of one race in a different way than treating others for the race. Educational institutions violate the law. ”
Essential racial preferences established “through application essays or other means” are also illegal. The Supreme Court gave us an example of this. While the university may be allowed to consider “applicant's discussion of how race influenced their lives,” preferences for the applicant “must be linked to the student's courage and determination.” It may not be useful as a “racial-based” preference proxy. It is recommended that you pay similar attention to all DEI initiatives. If diversity is defined in terms of race and gender outcome, universities cannot legally pursue diversity through any means.
I will force the President and the Supreme Court to reject it.[ing] The concept that government actors can intentionally assign preferences to people who have little in common other than their skin color. ”
A DOJ official told Boneitbart News exclusively that Bondi's memorandum is “an important example of the ongoing efforts to ensure that the Department of Justice incorporates harmful DEI practices from American institutions and that our legal system is built on the basis of merit.”
After Bondi notifies ABA February 28th letter The only “advance” was to abolish the Florida Day order. Appointment A working group rethinking the requirements for the bar exam.
“I hope other states follow suit,” a DOJ official said.
